Endoscopic submucosal dissection for removal of superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: A technical review

Table 1 Comparison between endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection

	Method	Total cases	En-bloc resection (%)	Complete resection (%)	Complication (%)			Year1	Reference
					Bleeding	Perforation	Stenosis
Esophagus	ESD	31	100	97	-	3	-	2008	Ishihara et al[5]
	EMRC	68	87	71	1.4	-	4.4	2008	Ishihara et al[5]
	EMR-2channel	72	71	46	-	-	-	2008	Ishihara et al[5]
Stomach	ESD	195	83	83	3.9	9.7	-	2006	Oka et al[6]
	EMR	825	42	23.6	6.2	0.5	-	2006	Oka et al[6]
	ESD	243	95.9	93	5.3	4.5	-	2009	Min et al[7]
	EMR-precut	103	77.7	89.3	3.9	1.9	-	2009	Min et al[7]
	ESD	303	92.7	73.6	-	3.6	-	2006	Oka et al[8]
	EMR	411	56	61.1	-	2.2	-	2006	Oka et al[6]
Colon (over 2 cm)	ESD	145	84	98	1.4	6.2	-	2010	Saito et al[9]
	EMR	228	33	86	3.1	1.3	-	2010	Saito et al[9]

¹Year of paper publication. -: Not mentioned in the article; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection; EMRC: Endoscopic mucosal resection using a transparent cap; EMR-2channel: 2-channel endoscopic mucosal resection; EMR-precut: Endoscopic mucosal resection after circumferential precutting.

Table 2 Characteristics of each endoscopic submucosal dissection device

Device	Marking	Pre-cut	Cut	Dissection	Hemostasis	Fibrosis	Beginner use	Figure
Needle Knife	O	O	O	O		O	×	Figure 3A
Flex Knife	O	O	O	O				Figure 3B
Hook Knife	O	O	O	O		O	×	Figure 3C
Triangle Tip Knife	O	O	O	O				Figure 3D
Dual Knife	O	O	O	O				Figure 3E
Flush Knife BT	O	O	O	O				Figure 3F
IT Knife 2	×	×	O	O				Figure 3G
Mucosectome 2	×	×		O			O	Figure 3H
Swanblade				O			O	Figure 3I
SB Knife	O			O	O		O	Figure 3J
Clutch Cutter	O	O	O	O	O	O	O	Figure 3K

O: Suitable; ×: Not recommended; Blank: Not ideal but can be used.

Table 3 Complications and outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection

	Total cases	Complication (%)				En-bloc resection(%)	Year1	Reference
		Bleeding	Perforation	Stenosis	Operation
Esophagus	107	0	4	18	0	100	2009	Ono et al[67]
	102	0	6	-	0	95	2005	Oyama et al[20]
Stomach	468	5.4	4.7	-	0.4	97	2010	Kato et al[59]
	478	8.2	3.6	-	0	-	2010	Mannen et al[60]
	589	1.8	4.5	-	0	94.9	2009	Isomoto et al[61]
	1000	15.6	1.2	-	0.2	95.3	2009	Chung et al[62]
	1033	6	4	-	0.1	98	2005	Oda et al[63]
Colon	1111	1.5	5.5	-	0.5	88	2010	Saito et al[64]
	200	1	5.5	-	0.5	91.5	2007	Fujishiro et al[65]
	268	0.3	2.2	-	0	99.2	2010	Toyonaga et al[66]

-: not mentioned in the article;

¹Year of paper publication.